Page 248 - Daniel

Babylon and that nation, the land of the Chaldeans, for their iniquity,
declares the LORD, making the land an everlasting waste” (Jer. 25:11–12).
Later, Jeremiah added in his letter to the exiles: “For thus says the LORD:

When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will visit you, and I
will fulfill to you my promise and bring you back to this place. For I
know the plans I have for you, declares the LORD, plans for wholeness and

not for evil, to give you a future and a hope. Then you will call upon me
and come and pray to me, and I will hear you. You will seek me and find
me. When you seek me with all your heart, I will be found by you,
declares the LORD, and I will restore your fortunes and gather you from
all the nations and all the places where I have driven you, declares the

LORD, and I will bring you back to the place from which I sent you into
exile” (29:10–14).

On the basis of these remarkable prophecies, Daniel was encouraged
to pray for the restoration of Jerusalem and the regathering of the
people of Israel. Daniel was probably too Old and infirm to return to
Jerusalem himself, but he had lived long enough to see the first
expedition of pilgrims return. This occurred in “the first year of Cyrus

king of Persia” (Ezra 1:1), and Daniel lived at least until “the third year
of Cyrus king of Persia” (Dan. 10:1) and possibly some years longer.

Darius was either another name for Cyrus, or had been appointed by
Cyrus as king of Babylon (see the earlier discussion of chapter 6). The
assertion of Daniel 9:1 that Darius “was made king” indicates that he
was invested with the kingship by some higher authority. This could
well agree with the supposition that he was installed as viceroy in
1
Babylonia by Cyrus the Great. This appointment is confirmed by the
verb “was made king,” which does not seem a proper reference to Cyrus

himself. It is of interest that in the Behistun inscription, Darius I (not the
Darius described in Daniel 9) refers to his father, Hystaspes, as having
been made king in a similar way.

Anderson distinguishes the duration of the captivity from the duration
of the desolations of Jerusalem in Daniel 9:2. He states, “The failure to
distinguish between the several judgments of the Servitude, the Captivity
and the Desolations, is a fruitful source of error in the study of Daniel
and the historical books of Scripture.” 2